FontStruct | FontStruction Feed: Onsquared

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Please excuse the X. He badly needs to go for a pee.

Comment from aphoria

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

The V and W are beau-ti-ful. You've really been on a tear lately.

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks, aphoria. I'm going to start my next alphabet with xyz. I don't know why I haven't adhered to that from a long time ago. Wishful thinking, I guess. You know, maybe the problem is going to magically go away by the time you get to x. Madness: repeating the same behaviour in the expectation of achieving a different outcome.

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

A plea to Admin: how about taking the site offline for a while and fixing the server issues properly? I'd rather that than experience too much more of the unable-to-save glitch. Anything but that! Good job I made a screen capture of the punctuation before I exited. I just had an inkling... the minisaves weren't working...

Comment from meek

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

@intaglio Sorry if you had some saving problems. The server is ok at the moment. Should be better than ever in fact. Problems with saving do occasionally arise with very large FontStructions like this one. We will continue to work to try and improve this. Let me know if this particular problem persists. Great work by the way!

Comment from thalamic

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I challenge you to do a completely standard font. No quirks. Go! ;)

Comment from Frodo7

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I agree with aphoria: the V and W are beautiful. But I also like the a, t, g. And the generous ascenders. 10. I also have some technical issues with Fontstruct: I simply can't open and edit one of my fonts, and some large fonts are displayed only for a few seconds.

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

@thal: ha! you're on. As a matter of fact I was coming to the self-same conclusion. Just what a completely standard font is in Fontstruct -- that's the question, isn't it! It's what I admire about some of the top-notch designs I see being released here. Beautifully thought-out and executed alphabets that follow the canon, yet have personality. @frodo7: thanks, I must say I was pleased myself with the l/c a and the g. A tight double-bowl at this weight and with such severe curve-cuts is always a dodgy proposition.

Comment from geneus1

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I'm really enjoying the nice subtle details on this and all of your recent fonts.

Comment from afrojet

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I'm a big fan of that 4.

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

@thalamic: it's remarkable how hard it is to resist the temptation to intagliate but the more I resist, the better the fonts get. Doh. Attempting to rise to your challenge (through gritted teeth) I'm working on this little number. I've taken a lot more care than I usually do to make sure everything is as tidy as I can make it (where the bricks fall on the grid, widths, etc) and so far, touch forehead, everything seems just so -- with the exception of the s which falls victim to the over-generous "curve" segments. Ive done it on a truly gargantuan scale which I hope is not going to be a file-size problem later on. I've done so because if I decide to strike a reg,bold and black, (hah hah! he's dreaming!) I need plenty of headroom in what will become tight intersects to pull it off. Comments welcomed (from anyone else too). I shall listen very nicely and then try not to go out and do precisely what I want. p.s. I realize the spacing is a little off. No point finessing it until I've got the dreaded upper case done.

Comment from minimum

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

First: Thank you for taking up the challenge. *emo text deleted* You have really taken the challenge to heart, I see. You have kept the ascender height normal and I like the shortish descenders. I see you are tweeking the widths of certain characters that have the tendency to go too wide (k x x z) which may not be necessary. Try alts without worrying about the width. Also try a double bowl g as that is more standard in text fonts. As for s, I think what's tripping you is maintaining the upper and lower curve. I think it is entirely appropriate, especially for the challenge font to have a different (smaller) upper and lower curve from the rest to allow for the shallow diagonal to have space. Even if you ignore all of this, it's still looking very good. Next, I shall challenge you to really do the bold.

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

OK I shall do those. I'll park the present k,x,y,z somewhere so I can always go back. I can see the inconsistency of those with a straight-edged v and w. More or less OK in a super light face, but could become problematical in a bold. The upper case will be a struggle -- maybe insurmountable -- if I don't keep those forms, however. As for the s: usually I tighten the bowls for letters with stems like b,p,d etc. This time I've got the same thing going over the whole lot, which adds a certain overall look. If you think it's ok to tighten up just the s I'll try that. I guess what's important is maintaining a balance between "look" and obedience to the mechanics of construction. That's where the art is, n'est? As for a bold... !! We'll see if I can master my impatience with doing the same stuff twice, shall we! Not that it is, of course. It might as well be a completely different beast. All the sweat and work with only the (to me!) tiny advantage of extended usefulness. Ugh. I might ditch the "seriflets", too. I know they'll give me grief. What do you think?

Comment from shasta

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

haha, totally know what you mean... normally takes me 1 or two hours to do A to V, and 1 to 2 months to do W to Z. thank god A is always the first letter. i think i'd freak out if i had to do that one as one of the last as well - i never seem to get a really satisfying A. but when it's the first letter you create, your pretensions just aren't that high yet, and you can move on to B in peace with the world even with just a mediocre A... (someone should probably write a thesis about fontstructors psychology. :P) very nice font, great readability... but the thing that got me really exited here is that screenshot of your "standard" font... can't wait until you release this beauty! may i suggest Exempla to the standard font competition? ;) (maybe it should lose some weight and grow some serifs though...)

Comment from intaglio

Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Thanks for your interest, shasta. Here's a screen capture of progress so far. I fully intended to rise to thalamic's challenge of a completely quirkless, standard font. But I started out wrong by using diagonals for the A, Vv, Ww, etc. Eventually I'll press on with a ruthlessly rational version but in the meantime I'm fed up with it. (It bores me.) Meanwhile this one is full of the usual intagliana, for better or worse. It's a hairline and I'm trying to strike a light and a regular off it, but I'll probably run out of steam long before I get to a bold. Ooops! Spelling mistrake in the sampler. No l/c x.